|
T: Who wants to be a special person? Notice that the teacher does NOT translate this.
How about Ji-young?
T: 선생님 하는 대로 하세요. Do as I say. Turn around. (Doing)
Dayeong--take a quick look at Seong-eun's data.
Notice the order in which the teacher does things:
a) divide the teams: "We have two teams: boys and girls"
b) cast the roles: "I'm Bill looking for (my) lunch."
c) characterize the activity: "Let's play tennis."
Compare:
T: Now, I'm Frodo. Craig, you are Smeagol, Gollum. Do you(pointing Ss) know the movie," The Lord of the Ring"? "반지의 제왕"?......Ok. Hey, Smeagol, pick up the pen and put it IN/ON/UNDER... the box!
Remember that in the Joon/Bill role play, we have
a) set the scene: "We are on a picnic in the park. This is lunchtime."
b) cast the characters: "I am Bill and Craig? You are Joon"
c) describe the activity "We are doing role play, OK?" "Yes, ma'am."
But in the Frodo/Smeagol role play, we have this:
a) cast the characters.
b) describe the activity ("Do you know the movie, The Lord of the Ring"?)
One again, the teacher offers the content of the activity BEFORE the actual structure of the activity. What happens if we REVERSE the priority? Does it work better? Why?
Now, I think that you've got exactly the SAME order right here in your data. FIRST you create the "special person". THEN you talk about the activity. What happens if you do it the other way around? Does it work better? Why?
T: 그렇죠. 반바퀴만 도세요. (Doing) E-->K, that is, Korean first, and then English.
T: Turn around. Go straight. (Doing)
T: Go straight to the mirror. (Doing)
T: Okay stop. Turn right. Go straight. (Doing)
T: Turn around. Okay go straight. (Doing)
T: go straight. (Doing)
Ss: 빨랑 가. English-->Korean
T: Thank you. Go back to your seat.
(S2: 똥개훈련이다~~하하하) English-->Korean
T: This time 우리 승준이
S: 나 안해.
T: 승준이, 어디가? Where are you going? Korean-->English
승준, Look at me please. Jump three times.
T: 승준, Run~~~ okay stop. Go straight.
Turn right at the corner. Come to the front. Okay thank you.
S: 내 자리로 간다~~ English-->Korean
T: 자, 아는 거죠? 오른쪽으로 도세요.
S: Turn right. Korean-->English
T: 왼쪽으로 도세요
S (?????): Turn left. Korean-->EnglishNow I want one volunteer. Who wants to be a volunteer? (Looking around...) Who says this? Is this really the child talking?
It's hard to tell what is going on. When you transcribe data, you need to be careful about who says what!
Now, right here we've got LOTS of data. It's very badly transcribed, and it's completely unclear. But there is plenty here, for example, if we want to answer the P1 question. This is a good statement of her problem.
So why does Dayeong want to continue? Because she's going to discuss the "looking not listening" question, and this has only established the problem, and not the solution.
Of course, there's a terrible danger if she does this. She'll have far too much data, and she won't be able to discuss it in anything but very general terms.
T: Ah-young, come to the front.
T: Ah-young why don't you go outside? A little bit? And you have to find this book.(showing)
(S: 나가있어~~하하/ 나가~!!)
T: Now, I'm hiding a book. 물건을 숨길 텐데요. 아영이가 들어오면 우리 모두가 한꺼번에 이 물건을 찾도록 지시해줘야 되요.
Ss: 선생님 제 책상이요~ /제 책상에 숨길래요./ 저 하면 안되요? Is it K-->E or E--K?
T: We have to teach her to the right place with direction words.
Okay, are you ready?
Ss;...... Yeah....~
(S: 야, 한 바퀴 돌려./ 이 쪽으려 돌리자~)
T: Come in, Ah-young. Now, you start.
Ss: Go straight. Go straight. Go go go go~~
Ss: Turn right.
Ss: Go straight. Go straight.!!!
Ss; And turn right. right !!~~
Ss: Go straight...~!!
Ss: Turn right. Stop.
(The volunteer is hesitating not knowing what to do beside the right place. And Ss don't seem to know what to do a little bit.)
T: 자, 그것은 너의 오른쪽에 있다는 뭐라고 했나요? It's??
Ss: on the right.
T: It's on the right. It's on your right. 그렇죠. 왼쪽에 있다는 뭐라고 하나요?
Ss: It's on the left.
T; Clap for Ah-young. 박수~~ Who's next?
T: Good. I'm going to give you some time. And you practice with these expressions. Like we did earlier. You do rock, scissor, paper with your partner.
Ss: Yeah~~
T: And the winners command to their partner. 이긴 사람이 명령을 먼저 하겠습니다.
I'll give you two minutes... (continues.....)
Too much data. When you have this much data, you MUST cut it into pieces and quote selectively.
If you try to "analyze" this much data, you will end up saying only trite and banal things, generalities that cannot help us understand the specific problems and specific solutions presented in the data.
===================================================
**I suppose I got the children listen.
Good! Where? You need data to demonstrate this. When you have presented the data which PROVES that the children are listening, you can cut the word "suppose".
First I practice some key expressions with my students using Korean (because I don’t see it’s the absolute way to learn English that teachers teach English only through English)
Let's say that the children are listening and understanding. Are they understanding the English, or understanding the Korean?
Since Dayeong is running away from the question, let us run AFTER her. Does the teacher use KOREAN first or ENGLISH first?
Actually there are two different kinds of Korean use by the teacher (and there is a third kind by the children).
a) Translating commands themselves, e.g. T: 그렇죠. 반바퀴만 도세요. (Doing)
b) Using Korean to manage the class, e.g.T: 선생님 하는 대로 하세요. Do as I say. Turn around. (Doing)
Notice that BOTH of these are redundant; that is, unnecessary.
In a) the child has already done the action, so it is unnecessary. Translation cannot help understanding at all, because the command was already understood when the teacher translated.
In b), the teacher follows it up with an action that makes the meaning clear. So the Korean is also unnecessary.
Dayeong says that she does not believe it is an absolute RULE that we have to use English in English class. Of course, she's absolutely right.
The rule is this: you have to answer the question on a midterm exam. According to your answer, Korean is what has made the utterances understandable. But according to your data, that is not true.
And then I picked one and gave her some commands for her to follow that were about expressions about movements) There were couple of expressions the students didn’t understand, which were the proper time for her classmates to assist. No examples?
Dayeong has too much data. She can't use it to answer the question, because there's just too much there.
Now, most of my students simply forget about the data and try to answer the question in general terms. This is quite useless; the question is not about theory, but about data.
Dayeong's approach is better: she remembers the data and tries to summarize it in general terms. But of course she's forgotten the question. And so she just gives a (redundant) summary of what the data already says (and what she said before the data).
How do we keep the question AND the data in mind at the same time? Well, here's a good way (but I have said this before!)
What you have to do is to copy and paste parts of the data into quotation marks and parentheses. Like this:
First, the teacher gets the children to listen by using Korean herself ("T: 그렇죠. 반바퀴만 도세요."). Then the children use Korean to translate what she says into English. ("Ss: 빨랑 가"). Of course, there's no way to know which children are listening to English and which are listening to Korean!
We have NO WAY of knowing whether the children are really listening to English, because:
a) Most of the children are not taking part in the activity. It's a T-S1 activity only.
b) The children can clearly SEE the result of the commands.
c) The teacher is translating everything into Korean.
But there IS some good evidence that the children are listening and not just looking, right there in the first part of the data. Look:
T: Turn around. Okay go straight. (Doing)
T: go straight. (Doing)
Ss: 빨랑 가. English-->Korean
They interfered to assist to her to go to the right direction. But the bad thing about the activity was students might’ve felt like they were dumb, because they had to follow the teacher’s command without any specific reason.
Why do you think so? Is there any evidence IN THE DATA?
Of course there is. Right here.
T: Thank you. Go back to your seat.
(S2: 똥개훈련이다~~하하하) English-->Korean
T: This time 우리 승준이
S: 나 안해.
T: 승준이, 어디가? Where are you going? Korean-->English
승준, Look at me please. Jump three times.
Now, you can see it's a VERY easy matter for Dayeong to go back to her data and copy and paste this so that she can prove her point.
It would be better if there was reasonable and enjoyable reason for them to do it with joy.
What is the evidence that the activity is not reasonable and not enjoyable? Can you show me?
And then the second activity was one chosen student had to follow their friends’ commands in order to find the hidden stuff. Through that activity, many students became to have the opportunity to speak out the right commands to the person, because the chosen person weren’t able to move without his or her friends’ commands. And importantly, the chosen student had to practice listening
through it.
When this whole activity ends, I had the class to do pair work with commands. After doing rock-scissors-paper, one person became a king and another person became a servant. The students seemed to enjoy the role-play in the simple hypothetical situation.
This isn't in the data, though. How does it help us answer the question?
I think we need to spend some time on how to answer questions tomorrow. You'll see! It's really not THAT difficult.
dk
|